HomeMy WebLinkAbout028-170-083t,
t
y�
,fir
,k/>J
���'�1�
�.r '4'b���4•�# � �.,
n` y��.
Vim
r1
*�
V
I)
t}
U
J
k�
Y
{
4
�i
_ NOTICE OF DETERMINATIOt'__- 1'
TS3 Secretary for Resources
I L,.
rl s
1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311
Sacramento, CA 95814 HEAR 2 11983
! "+
County Clerk, County of Butte !d
25 County Center Drive ELEANOR M.BECKER,CnuntyClmr,t
Oroville, CA 95965 ,
By 7C. JACOM pepu 1,
F P,C1+.' Planningi Department
7County CenterDrive (Fired)
Oroville, CA 95965
SI%JECTd Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with
Section 21108 or 21152 of the P 1'' }�es
� rces Code
_-�$-24�
ProFed T �tle 1±71 i1
• F
0`
at�.ve Parcel Alae AP 28-17-83 _ Shirley Smithe
State Clearinghouse g uSe� �� t,
Gantact Per--son ` Number (If submitted to Stage Cleara.n ho
Telephone Number
John Mendonsa, Public Works 916` 534-4266
pre; t�t,ocation On the north side of Obert Drive, 1300 feet
e 5f onev Oaks Bcitlle des Flat ate
Project Description;
Dividing 39 acres + to create folic 'p2tcels, one at 8 acres ?/ �
and three at 10 acres for residential use; �G
t
This is to advise that the Butte
Count BoOf
lLeacAgency)
!'
has ii-ade the following determinations regarding the above-described.
Project;
the environment.
1 Ile project will have a significant effect on
will not
i
2., 0An Environmental. Impact Report was prepared for this '!
project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, and was �
catti,fied as required by Section 15085(8), 14 Cal.iforat':
Administrative Cade
I� A Negative Declaration was prepared for this pro'ect
LoN pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. A copy of t�e
Negative Declaration may be examined at the Planning
Department, 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965.
3. A Notice of Exemption was filed indicating this 'projeot �r
is exempt from environmental review.
4, A statement or- Overriding Consideration 0 was, sins not,
adopted for this project.
51 Mitigation ,measures adopted by the Lead Agency to reduce
the impaz is of the app roved project , re
See attached
` Sl/g& ture
Stephen A. Streeter
March 16, 198 1. Senior Planner
Urate _'� � � T tle
.., AP 2# g
Diit i ;4b t 44ea �x°e
1, t' Zf iz '4rchaeoxogicalt +b(itecovered on the property,
late protecti o 'ine s�►no's shalx-= he approved by the
P1ttRt iri�a Departmenlatid' the cc�^iety for. ual fora a A ohae' ]ogy
hdr�te �levelopmaoccults",
1 ,
a �
i
Fi 9
,
h
IIS/
0
I
4
APPENDIX G
NEGATIVEDECLARATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the project described below has, been
s� reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California EnVironmental
Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code 21100, et. soq.) and a �
determination has been made that it will not havea significant n
effect upon the(:environment.
Log # 82-08-24-02
AP 28-17-83
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF' PROJECT:
Tentative Parcel Map dividing 39 acres + to create four parcels,
one at 8 acres and three at 10 acres for residential use.
3. Lb'CATION OF PROJECT:
On the north side of Obert Drivet''1300 feet east of
Stoney Oaks Boulevard, Swedes Flat area.
4. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT APPLICANT:
Shirley Smithey Eton Graves 4 Assoc.
Rt. 5, Boat 5702 P. 0. Box 1576
Orovill.e CA 95965 Oroville, CA 959.65
5. MITIGATION MEASURES:
See attached 1
6. A copy of the;,initial study regarding the,o vironmental effect
of this project is on—file at 7 County Center Drive, Oroville.
This study was:
Adopted as presented,.
o Adopted with changes. Specific modifications and
supporting reasons are attached.
7. A public hearing on this Negative Declaration was held by the
decision malting body.
Hearing Body Butte County Board of Supervisors
Date of Determination March 15, 1983
Determination«
On the basis of the initial study of environmental impact, the f.Y
inform4ion presented at hearings, comments received on the
proposal and our owr. knowledge and independent research:
We find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
LN effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is
hereby adopted.
We find that the project COULD have a significant effect
on the environment but will not in this case because of
attached mitigation measures described in item 5 above
which are by this reference made conditions of project
approval. A conditional NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby
adopted.
(gn ture
Jane Dolan, Chair
Boar of Supervisors
Title .
� MAR 181983
bate
Air 28-17.83
M&qf" `bn Measure _ s
f 1. If a�iy ai thaeological sites are discovered on the property,
appropriate^p'xotection measures shall be approved by the
k'lanri�t; Lic rtme t and the Society for al n' Archae6l�o�gay
before development, occurs. ti
!rt
o
,i
1
`\ 1
0
f
Yee' autto 'County Advisory Agency
a
`
lioml Planning Director
rjcri Report on Tentative Parcel Map of Shirley Sithey on AP 23-17-d3"
j ?
ah�r�r February�r► 198g
�.y
This is a tentative porcul map, to -create fourparcele, one at 6
and 3 at 10 acres.�n site, from a,' ')acro parcel located on the
north side,04 Obert Drive, 1300 io.t east of Stoney Oaks Blvd.,
Swedes Flat'area, IS wiles southeast of arorille. The pteseat
zoning is "M -R" (Mountain or Recreation Subdivision -Res deatial-)..
The Land Use Plan wap of the Butte County General Plan des-i=lotte
this. area as AgriculturalwResidential. The Safety Element of th*
General Plan indicates that this project is withiu a high fire
hazard area. There are no specific or community plans for the
area.
A mitigated Negative Declaration regarding environmental -impact
was originally recommended basedon potential significant adverse
impacts on wildlife. However, once a letter was received from
the Department of Fish and Game, the applicant was host agreeable to
modifying her proposal. (such as creating largeSr parcel sites and
ciustering homosites) to reduce these impacts. As a result, 9n,
envi�t�onrental impact report was subrsequently recommended by staff
as required by State law when potential significant environme0tal
$19 acts would result from approval of proposed developeents, and
which have not been reduced by suitable project alterations or alterne-
tivow. 'the Advisory Agency denied an appeal by the applicant' re�`l. ;_
garbling this 7EIR requitement on Do 60 1982. On January .x56
1981, the Board of Supervisors upheld the appeal. However, signi-
ficant wildlife impacts remain unmitigated for this project,.
The
pr et was found to conflict with two policies of the Rt}tte
County
General Plan, as determined by staff on June 14, 1964"
Specifically, the project as submitted (3 parcels At 10 acres, atnd
one parcel of 8 acres in size) does not meet the following Agri-
cultural -Residential conditional criteria necessary for division's
small than 20 acre parcel sixes:
41 Road capacity and saintenance
5} Access to commercial and school services
In addition, conditional criteria 03 (availability of adequate fire,
protection facilities) is questionable for the subject area.
Remoteness of the site location, substandard roads, and inadequate
circulation patterns combine to restrict development -,apsbility in
this area. An iroved access road to Ororriiie Bangor Hwy., La
Porte Road, or U�am (toad should be considered, at this time, to
provid Ofloi traffic circulation to this project and anticipated
land div�aions nearby. The area is remote from Urban se4Vices,
Advisory A ",CV
Shirley Saithoy Al
Page -2-
Pobrnary 7. 19 3
has .):nide' Inadequate t��
q affic circulation for the nurberof parcels ciirri"W�
served by the sitsting = road system and is identified as V.vtwt r**W
for Migratory dNr, fiords- based on curf int napes inforattloareat ..
data from the G;�liforsla Depatteent of Fish. and Gane,
Corrontly, +56 parcels .have been created off the si�agote� ujosk oa�4s
rood. Stoney Oaks Blvd. (7 parcels have current baa-141$ap4to ,
p6V*1t*, on-site'•. creating potential cit-Culallon proMPOW w ew,
Cul -do -sac rural' grovel goad. The County 3ubdiv s•fon�' Ordi�`e
requites a maxima of 20. parcels sowed by, an# cut -d*i&sac reiiir�
Addit
legal bland divisions off this access road would furtket mg pW_
Y06 this problesi (which hits yet to be s orioed on=-�tlte-,gre
51*9e west'_ existing; parcels have not yet ac
be -Ott do' ►eloped)•711"16)l
..p y. y . , p , t
ex'1sti t 20 and 40 acre parcels served U " this, scco*i r;;&, wosry to
be divdid down tos, lg• acre+ density, over 100 total ar+�el�a xoishd��
result. This does not consider them regional cumvrlative. impacts
theesughout the Swedos Flat Area and on Swedes Flat Road stiosild thin
pattern b4come fully established,"
The,=project would be inconsistent,withGeneral Plan pmlicies tot
a) Relate residential densities to ;intensity and compattbltyr of'`
adjacent uses (.and Use Element p.34) .
' b) Balance residential densities with traffic%carrying capacities 0
of existing and proposed circulation plans (LUE p.34).
c) Guide development to areas with adequate fire protection services
(MM p.43).
d) Encourage development in and around existing communities with
public services TWB p.30)
e) Regulate development in identified winter dear ranges to facilitate
the survival of door herds (LUE p41).
-therefore, a denial is reconended.
In the event project approval is granted, the Tentative Parcel Map
should be conditioned with;
1) Meet the Subdivision Ufdinance requirement* for ttaffic circul�,yonr
E
s �^�
t
parcels on thenorth side of Obert
Driver tb east of Stoner Oak Blvd., Swedes Fiat area =
Engineer; icon Gravea-& Associates
NCr. Streated requested a few rinutenbreak at this time.
eihdonaa calmed a five minute rs6e44-
*W Ma ndonia thea called the meeting back 1t, s+essiolt
HEARING, 0 "TIM,
i
a Mike Evans stated that they were in the pr&4ess of gettite sot of the prnpOrtyr
owners together in the way of helping with road circulation problems with a
br dgt or Large culve-"t crossing on Honcut Creek 1uit north of the 1p►rs3.l Stai'th
property.b'OEnglneering4s being done,: property, owners' are being; contacted, genet -91
1
CI
Cr
t1
c
f
r\
r
ki
'i
Ii
i
hill -M.. • - , ', n Y '' a .F • n •
a n ♦ +
interest is 114 ng st rred to alleviate some of those problems. One small fact -or
th--,influences people into participating or not is what they will get out of it.
Many have been approved previously with certain conditions. In order, for the
burden to be spread amongst everyone evenly again, there has to be ie. 1,h;oturn.
Be'rorel we can get too tar down on these projects we are going to have to ; ,'come
approvals. We don't have any problems vith any of the Public Works or the Health
conditions, we`have met all of those., The zoning is inappropriate., Wa, all know
that.,L it is more like five and ten acre minimum parcel sizes due to the 1and
constraints. He spoke of circulation problems.
I would like to ask the
.Advisor Agencye`ncy for approval of the
Smithey abd the Sm1th
project they are very Instrumental in this oup getting the. participation
needed to salve somethese things.
G
,1*. Mendonsa asked. Mike Evans if he had contacted his - client at the ehd of last
week.
Mr. Evans said yes.
Mr. Mendonsa said that he had gotten a call. from. Ms. Smithey. She was uppdsed'
to condition ##9 which is the $750.00 fee for Swedes Flat Road, Iia wondering,
did she change her mind.
,Ir. ,Evans said i;, t she is opposed to it. We.:would ask that that be wa,�ved.
based on other pdopleh project not having to do that. I have mixed feelings.
on that myself. I don't know if that is in your jurisdiction to wipe. that out
or not.
There was some discussion about this requirement.
Lowell Smith, 724 Rebecca, Chico. She asked that r talk to you concerning
the Board meeting of March 28, 1978 imposing a $700 or $750 Swedes Flat Road
fund which I don't particularly oppose. So far thl.rw has been raid into this
hand $8,370.92. Iie named the people that had paid into this fund. The question
is, Is Swedes Flat Road a county road? if it is a county roan ,t;hen this would
be illegal to collect money from people for a county road and i'.,' they did collect
them they were entitled to the interest. - "
There was some discussion regarding the interest from this fund.
Mr. tderidonsa stated that the problems that we had with Swedes Flat R -)ad when
divisions first started in the area, this was a hearing before the Board whether.
legal or not legal I don't know) the Board placed the condition as this -- that
Ifthe people that lived out there wanted approval from the county to divide
Property they would pay this money. if not, when the Board set this up there
was an either or,eit�.'fou agreed to do this or we are just going to Flat deny
everything out there.
Mr. Smith said he had no problem on his part but like Shirley, this is $3,000 that
she doesn't have.
There was some more discussion on this matter.
David Zackery; Obert Drive, a person likes to see his money spent widely. I called
Clay Castleberry about 2 Veeks ago and t told him about a big boulder that had
fallen down in the ditch on Swedes Flat in front of the culvert and happened to
0
BUTTS COUNTY -:1 AO AGE-9CY MiY alts � Fagg $
February 14Y 1983
have a loader up there at tii'e time. They hauled the loader and the grader down
They came aut acid did the road the other day and it is just to the pont where
you can hardly get through it it's just a slop mesh:
Mr. Meftaonaa said one thing he wanted to point `out was, the $750. ray Understanding
when the Board set this up *,etas not a maintenance fund. They were going to attempt
to maintain the level they had before. "The level they had befbre was not much
of a level." That was,understood all the way along. We did not put a lot of
money into maintaining that road.. The road is not a major route. Thik4774
was going to, start a fund and eventually they were going tor let contracts oast end
11 actually rebuild the road completely.
There was more discussion about the conAiti,on of the Swedes Flat Road.
WRMG CLOSED Tt7 THS PLMLIC AND CCWFINED To THE ADVISORY AGENCY,
�T Steve Streeter said that some of those 10 -acre parcels .are near the
+r� the Smith and Smithey parcelsOiVere created in the mid 70's« Therm ha'*:,Seen\ F'
I two in ... November of 1981. He spoke cif the cii-culation Ptob3.nm: , Ufa still
have these concerns and we just got this Letter from the Department )Lt Vish and
Game that the Board didn't have the benefit of reviewing.
f
' Mr. Mendonsa stated that Fish and Game has come forward with more inforaati i--'
that has not been
.given at the original. hearing: T believe there was info0,6ttion
submitted granted given to an, applicant, but' submitted at the Board that Fisiih and
Game may have come back and said was erroneous information. -'
1
F
Mr. 5treetersaid yes that was regarding the Mooretown herd. Ic was a map
..that was obtained showing that winter range didn't actually go.'down in this
area. We got a copy of a letter from Fish and Game on February 1+, 1983'
J
indicating that .the map depicted deer herd bou#tdaries. The /1cnform tion shown: �
on the map was outdated and in error and shop-ld 'be disregard -d. Butte County
Planning has a map of the updated version If-'yciu need that information..
There was some discussion on deer herds; access roads and commercial services
in the area.
Mr. Mendohsa stated that the booklet shows different actions we have to take
a nd we don't have much choice which -way we go. When it was at the Board hearing
it was a three to two vote and 4st was clear what they thought but when these
issues mmetpthey are going to re to be resolved at that level..
Mr. Streeter stated that this letter is indicating that their earlier comments
were based on scientific information and week by week we continue to get more
and more from Fish and Came.
Mr. Reid stated we are over 20 parcels on a cul-de-sac.
Mr. Mendorsa stated that that can be conditioned (the circulation) whether they
can meet that condition or not. In fact, that condition is going to have to be
added to ours. If no one likes the condition it can be appealed to the Board.
The Board determines if there is a problem with circulation out there and if carp.
then to be it.
rW. Streeter stated then you would say ;provide circulation?
h`.r. Mendonsa stated "yes," as per county ordinance. I think that I would
request that that be made a condition.
D
C)
i
Fl"i' TI'Y A ` ZSaR M NCJ &S pager
Mr.8hreetirl m the r'. Ake Will _g to motion to deny the tentative pmrcel ma
.. Streetez stated. ��� ill. make
p
foey� a ? 3 b create four ,parcel';a finding that the project
conflicts of is es of the Butte County General. plaA as disc`azaed in the FeUmary
7, 1983 Planning Dire-otor�s Report and further noting that a ;l+ettec Was received: j
frm the Department of F#.sh & Gaiie on February 32, 1983 pertaining to the prodect
which inaitates that the carlier recommendations Vere based on nAentific
reaearch and that their recommendation is far larger parcel si�,es in,thie rt3.oh
of the Mooretown doer herd winter range.
Ir
Mr. Tieid seconded the motions and it was unanimously carried.
__mo�ww .,r Y. "rii u:r" •. ..'r.uwr.�:r:Y.w.rfrw.wslY+ri. rirAwif'aVir-1Wi.+/
"aF'•"'r'..:'_. ...•wa+...._:;m.vt �•*-'.; �-:::....-- ., aM � �:K��+r..•+r.u.a...:rsa+�ry[Mpw
0
r !
1) C.
�wr
4
,AnVtSOkY AGENCY MINU'S'ES 2/14/83
ri
o .
;. YIAi'lftt .WN W.. APPAM Of
Sh#rleY 'gmitheyt ,AP 28-17.83, 4 parcels on the north aide of hart
Drive. 1300 ft. east of Stoney Oak Blvd. , Swedes FlAit area,
in+ertr.. .
Ron Graves and Ass6ciatdes
Mike "F,vahza of Ron Graves and AsaoclAtea, said that the applicant agri"
to the orlainal mitigation, measurna. Ms. Smithy. WOU14, like to umapond
to the fallow -up letter from the Planning Dept. thick reguanted additions),
mitigation meakurea.
Me. Smithey gave the Advisory Agency a copy of Appendix I'- page 8 at �.
She need a sentence Which she had underlined, "The California Dept,, of'pihh
and tame policy` indicates that parcel densities greater than Ito acres in
aixe are incompatible with coAinu�d deer 'usage of range." She aske4
what that meant.
Bt,ft COU M AgYI..JA'Y AGOOf 1 rWM F4 go 5
Dec**er d, 1OW
Mr. Streeter explained what the statement was meant to mean.
Me. Smithey said„;�hat V. *meone can't make himself understandable in a
letter, how can the be ected to eainply with mitigation measures' She
said that she is being asked to prepare an FAIR, tsksed on the blAnie t
recommendation of Fish and Game which they intended to be statevi;de.
The Advisory Agency says, thoy iNill consider the Dept. of Fish and dam as
the experts. Me. Smithey said ahe would like vrittan proof of the
alleged studies that have been made. She is supposed to disprove the
itatemen'ts F'ish� and Game bane made. As yet she hail seen nothing pzxfen
that -needs to be disproven. She doubts'that Fish and Game Imre ever been
on her property. There are deer there and some aiigta14e, but they have
fadahouseortira� the deer haoulxl be protected
condominium. she dos
. If e b�iiltt r<
p B g
pr from poaching. People need to
protect themselves 'from the deer. Gardene Mould proVide morks :Good for the.
deer. She does not know haw many deer are -considered a herd�'She has Never
been more than $ or 6 at one time. Why is there - a concern k6t the deer all.
of'a a sudden! The anti -growth ,policy is losing popultr intiii6to Z'he
righti othe property over should be considered. dhe thitft aWe..;dieser '
arebeingused 'as a scapegoat. There cant t be that mu ” h growth iii the area
are
use the acceaa road ie in poor shape and trill a ,E tfp taap7bared, rrhich
is fine with Ms. Smithey. She ;purchased the propes,�i.y�� toe'!' etWitty frcm other
pe6ple. The purpose of the split is f'br family rea4ioTts. W& sister and
parents will be living up there also. ,Anything, such at btriers, can be
done wihout splitting the property just as well as by .spiAting -the property..
It is not fair to allow her neighbor to have•a 5 uteri parcel and not let
Ms. Smithey have a 10 acre parcel. The Advisory Agency should be more
consistent. She pays her taxes and should not 'be tolk,*hat she can do with
her property. If Fish and Game are so concerned about the deer, they should
create a wildlife preserve, or pay Ms. Smithey for using her property es a
wildlife preserve. it should be possible to reach a fair resolution of this
px6blem.
Mr. Streeter said that these letters from Fish and Came extolling 140
acre parcels have beenh coming in since this past March. Before that date,
Fish and Game was recommending 20 acres and the Cougty was not paying
Attention to them. Because of that particular change and because of some
deer concerns in other parts of the county, Fish and Game has been sending
more consistent letters on the policy. It is not a new concern. Tbo Map
Act and county General Plan have been there a long time. Actually, this
problem should have been looked at more closely years ago. As was mentioned
by Mr. Jensen and Mr. Mensehat� at the Board meeting, the county is not bound
by Fish and Game's input. If that sort of input is coming in and an exception
�a made, the Board should most properly mak6 an exception. At staff level
exceptions should not 'be made withoutpolicy direction from the Board. There is
no apecific parcel size set, but the deer must be protected and the Dept. of
Fish and Came is the agency that in considered the best judge of how thjy
era beat protected.
Mr. Menddnse said that the Board has not given a policy in this regard,
although they did uphold appeals regarding action on this same kind of
situation. Fish and Game are the experts, The Board trill probably not
give policy direction.
Iliac. 6, 19W
d
BUTTE COUNV ADVTSORY AMUCY MINUTES Page. 6 \,
D+teevaber 5, 1.982
r
kv. Mefidonsa said that the MAp Act is clear that m prd3ect must be denied"
It there will be an avoidable inaAct on Wildlife. Thestate agency' d"r
th� statement that titre Mr 11 be an impa�xt; This agenoy would have
\
'to mke 'the finding that the Dept. of Fish and C ft is wrong°3n this matte
in order to approve the project. ,
,. Mr. Streeter said
that Mt,, iiecreat�,Onal zoning allows t1o�n t0 102 acre
, parcels, _
ter. Reid said that is about the tdafi m posai�.ile parceRi wise: freta A san%teltion
point of viers 'under the beet conditionai,
II .
Mb: Mendonsa sand that Clay Gastleberx;ya had talked to atv Bosx+d mei iesrs
and, asked them if, by their action on the, appeals, they" had maaCt to g Ne
policlr.diredtion and they had said, "No."
Reid stated; r trill make a motion to deny the request of an app"I
of the requirement for an environmental impact report of Shirley Smithey
N,Ir.
on Air 28-17-83, finding that the Dept. of Fish and Game has indicated tiAt
this is an area of Special: Biological Importance and that`the doeftentat oh
is not physicallyavailable to adequately answer all the questions 'regaiditid
the possible biological impacts, therefore the: requirement for an°enVironment!k1
�Q�: V�e#Ot continues to be in effect. Motion seconded by Mr. Streeteir and
X� �ai�.Ii�usl�r
c, —
7anuary 24, 1983 ,
it
NaT. BdttY* '4",air
P1911 iiing Dlrcttor
7-county Center, Drive
Deaf- Ms. 7Blair q �
Ott your
quobtropertcembe�" 160 1982 T conduc-bed an ar#hasologidta,
y �
ies located within Butte County. That' �
are as follows $ . :.
Robert Schoextatein - A.P. #79,-�346 approximately W atreaa cif
lard located adjacent to the north'side of Purple Rock koa d,, ,
approximately J mile east of the intetaection with Hurleton
Swedod Flt Road. The property covott the SRI of theN� d{
Sectiob 35, T. 19 N., R. 5 E., Bangor •snd Radketby Quadrangles,
7.54toserioo. Tho proposed project is o divide the propbltJ4.
into four parcels. The, property has a, 06derate east to we.S°�;
a
slope ,with .an intermittent drainage through the western pbr1� ion
and along the southern boundary. The Vegatation is modest"bly
dehgo consisting of oako pine, mwizanita;l buckbrubh and e4lison.
f.
ShirleySmithey - A.Pt #9847-83 approximately
40 acrog., of
Iand located adjacent
to the north side of Obert Drivl,3; _
a`pprattimately t mile east of the intersbction with
},
ht�arae '
Oaks Blvd., in Swedes Flat. The property c6vers the ,�,N cif
the SEt of Section 9, T. t8 'Ni , R. 5 E. .0 Bangor end Rr. -Ikerb
Quadrangles, 7.5' series. The proposed) pro jset is--`" PLivi.1
property o
ty parcels, e prbjj erty is r
lelvel with LowerRocky HonoutCreek' flowing along tl�W fyorthero
b
oundary.The vegetation i5 generally a eh consistl�,,,;of
oak and grasses with some riparian vegotiition alongii',b�'tt.4,eek.
One cabin tAnd tine mobile home are currently located i e h i�Y+e
property.
0r g fg pro ;�� ti,•o i
,
Prior is conducting aield surveyy of thesee?
conoultad the a. chaeolo ical site record files main, iihrd at
California State University, Chico to determine if any
previously roarchaeologicalsites wets la,oted wtthih
or Adacenttothe property bouhdatiss
of these '.*o arialls.
One archaeological sito, CA-BUT-580, had pxeviotiisly beet
rdoorded on the Smithey propei1y. This cohsistea of a prehistoric
food proddsaing site made up cif sdYt-sal bedrock mortars.
January 24, 1983
�... 2
he' foowo of x surveys waa icor materials or foaturea, in'dicativo. s
prehiatoric or early, historio aotiwitis's. Both of the,o
raporty areas were alcalmin+ed by m" walking regularly spaaod,
inear, traheoota with an apprdiimats to;, motor interval, opao°ing
Or., tho",ehtirs aftt ,ot the properties: So miurials_ de �
ata ti iia+licative. ,of -Old rtoric or, early h'istbric1
a t%it'ie*. *or-* id*ht Jv*d' during, my ihapao't3oh of o -ft *rr
i?
party, -Oftrr thah CA -MT --580 'on tho Smithey prapr*1 .
b, drz*ok iaaorfara lobated at, CA-MIT-rASO acre SO. ah low,
a tw e
f or sit
4. Uaikoly
p J� ,3 l ioliaot the bou Ldor in 'w jrdt-%
" site x�� `�f"Bidfd k°+�' !�t!'t w'i�. � �
t " ► and 10iin it is adSao°ont tb an inta. �,�tt
d iti age ohahnhoxe' Xt: is thsreroro reoomwendtd 'tha ai6ha*o-
logical, cletrahoo be';,, grwitsd for both of` the proptrity, *w,*afa;
d6*4rlbod above.
W�
ruhaoo ogy Consnl.�a t
I")
1.
AND "W
MOO*,
l4v I"z
Butt& awInty planning Dina rtmnt
Otowilleo CA 95965,
I**r le, Streeter;
n* O**xbf&nt of Fish and Came has reviroma the Shirlelk 9*itI*,--%ntAdVe
pArcgj MApfor foqaparcels on 38 acres in the Swede's Flat ar*&,- SQOJ-410t
winter range whiO, in an ArO& of
patoole would be on MeretoWn t*er Herd
Softiod. ajological Iniportance.
This projikt would be an tjjCro&d"Mt on deer Winter rage L ag tht- Dq*tt-
irmht: rewwwds 40 -w -re minim Ai parcels for mitigation of, ad0tr4e, effect*
on der winter raMe. Cbupledwith other area tesidw�tial elIctObdWsnto
the project as. pvqxmwd would be a barrier to ai*r migration to 10vor
eltvation rakqes 'The. D"rtment reommendil the parcel mV be donied due
to z0Qerse,irqw-ts onvi.141ife'L
It- the Dtpartment can be of further assistandeo pikage contact Zerry
'-
7nech, jwiromwtal Services Supervi W -Ir telqfthe (916) 3557030.
,
Paul, T. aerd*n
jugion&I Mab*]er
Duos Co. 1480"Ing
OCT 2 0 19M
OMV116. 04110111is
IR
41,
AP 28-17-93
Dxseus'�"Xbo or UVIMMMENTAL EVALUATrom
This project is a tentative parcel map to divide 39 acres + to -
creatt four parcels, one At 8 acres and thr4\�t at lad acres T6't'
residential uso. The prupartyQ,,is located on"�he northA ' f
sift ofQ
Obert Drive, '1300 feet cast of"StoneyOaks Bouidvard, Swedes.Fifat &'r6*6'
,The site is gentle to mod6ratoly sloping foothill Oak woodland on
shallow (20-40 inches) vall-drained sandy loam soil. The nattharly
portion of the --property is traversed by LpWer Rocky Honcut Creek.
This, ptoperty lies immediately east of another land division curf.Cintly
'being considered for Dowell V. Smith on AP 28-17-M I
Butte County General Plan designates this area as Agricultural -
Residential. The zoning is M -R (Mountain Recreation Subdivision
klt$idential), The site liek.-I in an area of high natural fire hazard.
le: The subject property is in an areav, ith high to
erosion. in this -case, the gentle to moderate terrain -reduces �,,he
magnitude of this factor,
:ilho The. area it subject to earthquakes as part Of the general foot-
hiiis regioli.
'3h-. Grounawavar -resources may be limited. The Division, of" Environ-
mental HealW,(will require proof Of the required quantities of domestic
water for pdrctls lo 3 and 4. Some nearby parcels hatre established
'water supplies; evidence of water exists for 5 to 10 acre, parcels in
this area.
4ay. Some vegotatioift removal will occur as the parcels are developedi.
The'project lies -within a key migratory deer winter tango*
5b: :,Encroachment and -reduction of wildlife habitat would occur. The
property iswithin an a'eC)��a of Special giological Importance, the
gratory M I doretown deer herd winter range (uhich extends over much
of the,Swedes�'Flat area). The California Department of Fish And Game
policy indicates that parcel densities greater than 40 acres in size
are incompatible with continued deer usage of range. The County Land
Use policies support the prot6.etion of winter deer range. The habitat
value has been compromised by existing development patterns in the
area, particularly adjacent to Hurleion-Swedes Flat and Swedes Flat
roads, Therefore, the project vicinity it especially important as
i
one of the few areas of larger parcel siz�js between the hills to the
West and tha higher elevation summer deer range to the east. This
is a concern which has to be resolved on an ar�awide basis) and each
ihdividual project has an incremental, impact on this. resourteo The
project is is a particularly sensitive location.
Pippen(lix F page .3 of 9
li YES MAYBE N0'
,.
,22, ,M&ti ndirt s of Significance.
a. ftos the pro,jedt heave the potenC'.a1 "
to degrade the quality of the
eenv,ii;niweht, substantially reduce
theR� habitat of a, fish or wildlife
p
speeeles;, cause a dish_ or wildlife
<a
population to drop below self
P, sustaining levet,, threaten- to U
J aelWnait*,.* plan'tor animatl. coo -
reduce the numbeer of restrict
tht range of a rare, or endangered
plant or Ani*al or eliminate ixaport i!t ,
*xampiss of, thci major periods -of:
hat+atr or
Caffbrni�a p�'oh3.mtr��ty3
b DO'Oes the. 'project have the pettnxiaY
tO achieve short term be4eflt4 to
a
the detriment of publicly adopted,
R tong -term envircr..m+ental goals? .,�...
.�-
F c, Does the 'protect have impacts which
W'
are individually •limitedy but
"
icumuts,t�.vel 'considerable'? (a Project
y
E ,y ,impact on two or more :sepaiate
tdaborces tahere the Impact on each
�
resource is relativelf small, but
where the effect of the total of
" those impacts on the environment is
significant.)
d. Ddtz the project have environmental
effects which will,cause substantial
adverse effects on humatl beings,
»
either directly or indirectly?
l
�I
i,
Appendix y . page 7 of 9
AP ,Zg-1+ 83
/ DISCUSSION OF pNV'I1k0S 'vbNTAL EVALUATION (continued)
As a minimum toa�pram sea clustering of homesites on the proposed
parcels would help toduce impacts on wildlife habitat, permitting
an open space corridor for defer migration through the properties
(since dor avoid dey�olopment sites). ,
8a,, 14, 15a Th#,,..+extof the land Use Elementindicate% thin p*Tcels
between 1 to 20 acres n size are conditi+onallyconsistent bra.,to
i
the isolated, remote 'nature of 'this area, its minimal public: seTrit
avall0il.ity (fire, police, schools; ,roads, cow.tr+cial 'serir'ttex
paver, and telephone)� uncertain domestic Wates , vallability., Arlhiel
increased fuel cromsumption required for c6xaut5.ng, a trend toward
parcels smaller than, '20 acres in size may be premature. lesi.dent,�iF r
in this area must expect ai lower level of service than ,is typicx:1
for less isolated °properties nearer urban se rices.
13c: The project Mould add three potential residences ,to a +cul,'--des,04. ►c., w
stree v,patttrm which provide sole legal aactjss to 40 parcels ± (20
parcels is the maximum permitted by County Subdivision ,Urdinance).
he poor circulation pattern is an areawi,e concAVk ,south of Swedet
Flat Road. The provision of an additional cir� ulativn route is an
important consideration. �
21: The site is located in an area gen rally &�psidered to have
moderate sensitivity'yfor archaeological resourceN,. A, survey by .a
qualified archaeologist is necessary to determine if any undiscovered,,
resources exist and what impacts from site ,dev+elopm6ht would be
probable. If any significant resources are discovered, necessary U
mitigations will be proposed to avoid de„[ruction of the talltural
resources.
Appendix p page 8a of '9
M. i
IV, DETMINATION,
(td be completed by the/
,Lead Agency)
nitial.evaluationt
Oh ths, basis of this in
t-
0, 3L find: the proposed project COULb. Not have a sL#*J—ft*aVj
effect on the eiriVironmento, and, a NECAVIVX DEMMUOU
A s re,'a6mmended.
I find that although the proposed project c6uld,haft)-a
'�-Ajqnificant effect on the enviromments 't'therehor1411 notr
b*& significant. effect in this ease becAus* the,
glititlation,-measures described on, an attached sheet
have been added tothe project. A NEGATM' DECUMV10",
IS kMOMMNDPD.
0 1 find the proposed project MAY have a signific*nt,,
effect on the environment,, and an ENIVIRONMENTAL IMENCT
REPORT is required.
f!
octobet 14, 1982 Ai
Miq H, turesr
Stephen A. Streeter
Senior Planner
Fort
SuEre—County rian! Mg MOE.
Reviewed
Reference,. Initial study for the Lowell V. Stith tentative parcel
map# AP 28-17-85,
Apoendig F - Page 9' Of 9
�40)
AP 28-17-83
MITIGATION MEASURES
ly Sow homesi'te locations on the tentative and final pave+ei
*ups in a cluster arrangement to uc
rede itpact on ttdldi€ies
(i. �e. lo
igpatxon. cat u building sites near etch athe4tl`,,
,tieing open space editidors undeveloped)
if an archaeological sites are discovered on the pto �
eppro��ciate proUction measures ,shell be approved
�►
Pi Aepart..:�nt and tha, Uciety fox Califernaz Ar�cha�ei�lragY
before development; occurs.(,'
m
11